Speech
of
His Excellency Fidel V. Ramos
President of the Philippines
During the Presentation of the Rotary Club of Manila Journalism Awards

[Delivered at the Manila Hotel, February 6,1997]

Rotary’s tribute to
Philippine journalism

THIS AWARDS PRESENTATION gives us the opportunity to pause—at least for a couple of hours—to survey the work of the media in our country, and what it means to the nation.

As a community, Filipino journalists do not relish instruction from a politician—least of all from the President—about their work and its meaning to society.

But perhaps, if I remind you that I am a voracious reader, listener and viewer of what you report daily in the press and broadcast networks, you will be disposed to listen to what I have to say You prize your audiences, after all, above everything else.

A right that may not be abridged

Since their launching in 1966—31 years ago—these awards have sought to express what the nation values in Philippine journalism, and they have celebrated what we mean when we say that freedom of the press is a right that cannot be abridged either by law or by the government. Rotary’s awards have sought to honor outstanding examples of the service that journalism provides to our society.

By implication, when outstanding work and individual journalists are singled out for recognition, we are all reminded that certain kinds of journalism exhibit excellence and others do not.

Of the books that have been written on good journalism, perhaps the late journalist and diplomat Clare Boothe Luce expressed the idea most succinctly. Good journalism, she said, “is the effort to achieve illuminating candor and to strip away cant. It is the effort to do this not only in matters of state, diplomacy, and politics but also in every smaller aspect of life that touches the public interest or engages proper public curiosity. It is the effort to explain everything from a summit conference to why the moon looks larger coming over the horizon than it does when it has fully risen in the heavens. It is the effort, too, to describe the lives of men—and women—big and small, close at hand or thousands of miles away, familiar in their behavior or unfamiliar in their idiosyncrasies. It is—to use the big word—the pursuit of and the effort to state the truth.”

Articulation of the truth

That the pursuit of the truth—and the articulation of it—is a highly challenging and inexact task, all of us will concede. The important point, however, is that the journalist must always try—to the best of his or her sometimes limited knowledge.

I see our awardees here today as among those who have tried—and succeeded. In the case of Mr. Teodoro Benigno, he has succeeded so well that he has won recognition also from his peers all over the world.

As a society, I believe we are blessed that we are served by a free press and a free media. Some may say—as foreign observers and citizens have often said—that we have the freest and most free-wheeling press in all of the Asia-Pacific.

Others may suggest that we are sometimes ill-served by the occasional excesses of our media. But it can never be disputed that as a nation, we have gained from having this “fourth branch of government” in our midst.

If we are today a young bull in Asia-Enjoying finally a spell of success after decades of crisis and stagnation—that is surely partly because press freedom is integral to the air we breathe in our country.

If the three essential branches of government have enjoyed some success in leading the nation to progress and stability, that is surely partly because of the unrelenting vigil that the media have kept on our public affairs.

If we have put in place public policies and programs that work, that is surely partly because of the vigorous public debate fostered by the media that attends the making of policy and the implementation of programs.

And finally, if today we are succeeding in proving to the world that democracy and socioeconomic development can complement each other, surely that is partly to the credit of our media.

At last count, we have today more than 200 newspapers and magazines, 99 TV stations and 517 radio stations serving our more than 69 million people. Only a handful of them are government-owned and operated.

Overall they represent a vast network of channels of information—which receive little guidance and no dictation from the Government. They report and comment on the news as they see fit. And, by and large, our people are better informed than most of our neighbors in Asia.

A gap between the best and the worse

Yet by the same token, this vast network of information represents a wide variety and quality of service. The range between the best and the worse is very wide—as these awards suggest.

You of the media do not need me to tell you that, occasionally, certain elements of the Philippine media have tended to misuse their vast powers and shirk their responsibilities in reporting the truth. Some of you yourselves have been the first to point this out. You have your own organizations—like the Philippine Press Institute and the Kapisanan ng mga Broadkaster sa Pilipinas—that regularly review your work and hear complaints from the public.

To speak of this here is not to scold; it is only to remind that the media cannot afford to be passive before the shortcomings of some of its members. That the effort to raise standards must be a constant goal—for only by such an effort will our citizens and foreign friends know what is happening in the country and therefore be in a better position to appreciate our overall condition and to make proper choices in life.

As a society with a long journalistic and democratic tradition, we ought to guard against the recurrence of the time when we figuratively went berserk over the Flor Contemplacion affair, which, as many of you will remember, was largely fueled by frenzy in media reportage and commentary.

Guarding against demagoguery

As a society where journalists enjoy considerable influence and celebrity rivaled only by our entertainment stars, we ought to guard against the kind of demagoguery that sometimes disfigures the discussion of public issues—as when we demonize a rise in oil prices or the introduction of a new tax. In a situation where crude-oil prices are rising abroad, Government cannot after all hold the line against raising fuel prices at home without engendering worse fiscal problems in the process—to the prejudice of the taxpayers in general.

And as a society that must confront many ills through its public institutions, we need always to remember the difference between ensuring those institutions from collapse and lambasting their officers and men for their failures. Confusion over this has sometimes happened in the media when we have had to confront lapses in the work of the police with respect to crime, or those of the judiciary with respect to the administration of justice, or those of the executive and the legislature with respect to the making and implementation of laws.

The role of watchdog of government and society is an indispensable service of the media. But it serves best by remembering always the moral lesson for the media—and, for that matter, for all of us—whether institutions, officials, concerned citizens or Rotary members. We all must ceaselessly review and criticize our own work in order to do better.

As one of your own has aptly observed: “The failure to inform the public better is the evasion of press responsibility; and the failure to educate and elevate the public taste is an abuse of journalism’s freedom.”

The Rotary Awards for Journalism focus their attention mainly on public-affairs journalism. But today, much of the attention of our media is devoted to entertainment and other interests—services as vital to the public. Of late, as we have seen in letters to the editors and opinion columns, many more are complaining about the debasement of popular taste— especially in entertainment.

We cannot call for excellence in public-affairs journalism and accept mediocrity in the other. We must do better on both fronts.

I underscore this point because I believe we are living in a time of opportunity in our country when the media, no less than the other sectors, can strive to do something greater and finer in their service to society.

A larger horizon of possibilities

Today, and perhaps as never before, we are a nation that is growing in our sense of union and purpose. We have a larger horizon of national possibilities which, in earlier years, we could only dream of.

Consider this. Five years ago, we were billed all over the world as “the sick man of Asia.” And we accepted that label as just and fitting. But today we are finally moving forward as a nation. And we can even believe now that we have a tiger in our tank.

Just eleven years ago we were a nation in the grip of strongman rule. But today we are again a functioning and thriving democracy—the showcase for the beneficence of democracy and freedom in this dynamic and highly competitive region of the Asia-Pacific.

And just a year ago, we were a land racked by separatist and factional conflicts that pitted brother against brother. Today we see many of these conflicts resolved and replaced by cooperation. Most of our disaffected brethren have returned to the fold and made common cause with us of the mainstream in the engineering of development. For the first time, Christians, Muslims and indigenous communities in southern Philippines see themselves as teammates—not as adversaries in the common fight against poverty and social inequity.

Keeping our heads in a storm

These changes in national life provide us with an enduring foundation upon which to build a future that can sustain us and make us all proud. And we can do this if the Government, our social institutions and the media pull together in strengthening the nation and in enriching our common life.

In saying this, I do not suggest by any means that the media should sacrifice their hard-earned freedom for the sake of collective goals. I mean merely to propose that the media must seize the opportunity to serve as a vehicle for objective public enlightenment, and to exercise its power for public leadership because like it or not the media guide us in the choices we make in our personal and public lives.

If journalism cannot keep its head during a stormy time, we can scarcely hope to see our citizens keep theirs.

If journalism cannot provide enlightenment during a period of crisis or confusion, we can scarcely hope to see our people and our institutions find their way through the thickets of difficulty.

And if journalism cannot steer during times of opportunity we can scarcely hope to see our civic, political and business leaders provide sterling leadership to our people.

The sense of living in one world community has immeasurably expanded the range of concerns that must occupy our public life. Competitiveness in the global economy is not a matter of choice; it is an imperative for national survival. We must be engaged in the world, or be left behind.

In my view, this imposes on our journalism a much greater function than it used to embrace—on broadcasting no less than on print. It must possess a world view no less than a feeling for national identity.

Today, we are entering a period of transition when once again we will be witnessing the majestic transfer of the reins of government from one administration to another. During this change of leadership, all of us want to see that the momentum of economic advancement and social progress will continue, that the engine of development will remain in good shape, and that we will secure an even greater place in the family of nations.

Choosing among alternative futures

In a general way, all parties and all candidates want the same for the nation. But in the real world, we all know that leaders and political parties are not alike. And there are alternative futures before us. We cannot be passive in the search for the right kind of leadership that will take us competitively into the 21st century.

That search cannot be easy, but it will be infinitely more difficult if the media do not take on the responsibility of leading in the sober discussion of public issues and the weighing of public choices. Were journalism to depend solely on the self-serving statements and gimmickry of eager-beaver politicians, this forthcoming political exercise could lead us back into the pit of public paralysis, disunity and stagnation.

One of the greatest journalists, Walter Lippmann, saw journalism as a kind of searchlight that guided societies in their quest of the future, in the same way that a lighthouse guides ships in navigating their way through dangerous water.

Today in our search for leadership that will sustain—not just in the Presidency, but also in the legislature, in Local Governments, in the judiciary and in the private business sector—our people need the media to provide them light in understanding the issues and in weighing the credentials of those who seek to lead them.

A mirror for the nation

This is a power that Philippine journalism enjoys today more than it ever did in the past, because today our media— with their unparalleled reach and influence—are truly the mirror through which the nation sees itself. The range of the media has expanded into realms they did not touch before. And the capacity to form public opinion—given the new technology—has reached a level never before reached.

In presenting these journalism awards to our awardees here today, we therefore also express the prayer that Philippine journalism will measure up to these challenges of a new time.

We pray that the spirit that has kept us free will also make us wise. And we hope that the freedom of the press we jealously protect will in turn guard the lasting progress of the nation.